Date   

moderated Re: Language

 

On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 02:40 PM, ro-esp wrote:
Gender based should have a en dash.
I had to look up that one. I never heard of en dashes and em dashes and thought they were the same as hyphens..
The complaint should have been that "gender based" requires a hyphen, not an em dash. So that's the first problem. Second, the hyphen is NOT required. Not any more, according to AP style and other style conventions. Hyphens are going out of style to the extent that they should be left out except where the meaning is unclear. The meaning is perfectly clear in this case, so the hypen (not em dash) is unnecessary.
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


moderated Re: Language

ro-esp
 

On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 05:42 AM, J_Catlady wrote:

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 07:58 PM, Sharon Villines wrote:
Gender based should have a en dash.
I had to look up that one. I never heard of en dashes and em dashes and thought they were the same as hyphens....

It's a style issue.
No it's not. It's a matter of clarity. "gender-based/genderbased" is one word, an adjective. "gender" is a noun, "based" is a verbform, a participle.
"overpopulated/over-populated" is one word, not two

They're going out of style, and I would not use unless
meaning is unclear. I'm fine without it.
I'm not. Excessive use of spaces is killing clarity, both in English and Dutch.

groetjes, Ronaldo


moderated thumbing-up messages in a locked thread

ro-esp
 

I recently saw a locked thread, and noticed I could no "like" any messages. Is this intentional or coincidence?

If intentional, what's the rationale behind it?

groetjes, Ronaldo


moderated Re: Moderator privileges

Joseph Hudson <jhud7789@...>
 

If you want to know what moderator did what, you can look in the activity log for your group.

On Oct 12, 2018, at 3:50 PM, Beth Weld <bethweld77@gmail.com> wrote:

It would be very helpful to be able to limit what a moderator can do in terms of files, photos, databases, and wikis. Right now the moderator permissions don't control those by individual, and while someone might need to be able to upload files they might not need to be able to create a table as an example. It seems to be all or nothing for these items, and that could make changes very difficult to track in the future.
Thanks
Beth


moderated Moderator privileges

Beth Weld
 

It would be very helpful to be able to limit what a moderator can do in terms of files, photos, databases, and wikis.  Right now the moderator permissions don't control those by individual, and while someone might need to be able to upload files they might not need to be able to create a table as an example.  It seems to be all or nothing for these items, and that could make changes very difficult to track in the future.
Thanks
Beth


moderated Re: Suggestion: Ability to send PM from a member's profile page #suggestion

Duane
 

On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 11:33 AM, Brian Vogel wrote:
add in the figleafing of e-mail addresses in the forum interface
There was an option added awhile back that can take care of this on the groups you own/moderate.  You can show full email addresses in a group by selecting that option at Settings, Privacy, Hide Email Addresses In Archives.  If the archives are public, non-members will still see the figleaf, but members that are signed in will see the email address.  When the option was added, it defaulted to masking because that's what it had been.

Duane


moderated Comma separated addresses for Invite

Walter Underwood
 

I just edited an email “To” line with 28 addresses to be one address per line so I could send invitations. I probably should have done that with query-replace in Emacs, but it would be even better if the Invite box also accepted comma-separated addresses.

wunder
Walter Underwood
wunder@...
http://observer.wunderwood.org/  (my blog)


moderated Re: Suggestion: Ability to send PM from a member's profile page #suggestion

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

And when you add in the figleafing of e-mail addresses in the forum interface, it becomes a real nightmare.

I cannot count the number of times where someone has, through the e-mail interface, offered an e-mail address that I still have no access to since I have the "No email" option set for all groups I am on, except when testing.  And it does no good at all to switch to e-mail delivery after the fact and then have to ask for it to be repeated again, as that gets annoying to the group at large and the person who's already given the information.

Not that I'm expecting it will change, ever, but I will go on record again that I despise the figleafing of e-mail addresses on the web interface.  We all have spam trapping and it's a myth that any e-mail address is private in any meaningful sense of the word private.  Once it's drifted through cyberspace just by being used to send e-mail it can be sniffed out by anyone wanting to do so.
--

Brian - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1803, Build 17134 
     Explanations exist; they have existed for all time; there is always a well-known solution to every human problem — neat, plausible, and wrong.

          ~ H.L. Mencken, AKA The Sage of Baltimore


moderated Calander

David Haun
 

I am extremely happy with groups.io and think the CALENDAR the best around.  There was a comment a few months ago about the option of having the first day of the week being Monday.  Is that still under consideration?
David


moderated Re: Approval link ABOVE pending message? #suggestion

Max H.
 

Awesome, I can't believe how fast that was! Thanks, Mark!


moderated Re: Approval link ABOVE pending message? #suggestion

Chris Jones
 

On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 10:25 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
I've removed that text.
The "new format" notification is definitely a Marked improvement over the old.

Pun entirely deliberate.

Chris.


moderated Re: Suggestion: Ability to send PM from a member's profile page #suggestion

 

Brian,

An additional factor, unless I'm just inventing this from
the whole cloth, is that group owners can choose to have private
directories, in which case there's no way to establish off-group
contact with a member who is not averse to same with ease.
Correct. The Directory can be limited to Moderators and Owners, or may be disabled entirely.

Shal


moderated Re: Language Definition of Spam

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 10:29 PM, Ken Kloeber wrote:
The proper instruct would be to list what one CAN DO.
Neither a "permitted" or "forbidden list," alone, is sufficient.
 
--

Brian - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1803, Build 17134 
     Explanations exist; they have existed for all time; there is always a well-known solution to every human problem — neat, plausible, and wrong.

          ~ H.L. Mencken, AKA The Sage of Baltimore


moderated Re: Language Definition of Spam

KWKloeber
 

If one keeps going down the rabbit hole on topics/actions that one CAN’T do, you’ll end up in China.  It’s a never-ending/ever-expansive list one could generate.  And then it requires narrowly defining each item so there’s no end-around possible. 

The proper instruct would be to list what one CAN DO. The rest is, by exclusion, not allowed.  eg, messages directly related to the topic; or related to the stated purpose of the particular group; or whatever would pass the censor’s muster; not what wouldn’t get past the 6-second delay. 


moderated Re: Approval link ABOVE pending message? #suggestion

 

Excellent, thank you!

Helen


moderated Re: Approval link ABOVE pending message? #suggestion

 

Hi,

I've removed that text.

Thanks,
Mark

On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 12:51 PM J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 12:50 PM, Helen wrote:
even if I didn't, the above wording would not narrow it down in any way
Great point. 
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


moderated Re: Approval link ABOVE pending message? #suggestion

 

On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 12:50 PM, Helen wrote:
even if I didn't, the above wording would not narrow it down in any way
Great point. 
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


moderated Re: Approval link ABOVE pending message? #suggestion

 

I can live with that, but do we really also have to have this bit?

A message was sent to the group https://groupname.io/g/groupname from a@ that needs to be approved. This action requires your approval for one of the following reasons:

Your group is set to moderate all activity from this user, OR
Your group is set to moderate activity from all users, OR
This is a reply to a thread that is moderated

This fills my entire preview panel, meaning I have to scroll down to see the actual pendingmessage, which is not good if I'm in a hurry and trying to see what needs my attention before I go out..

I also don't see what value the three things above add. I already know this is a moderated message, that's why it's landed in my inbox. I usually remember why people are moderated, but even if I didn't, the above wording would not narrow it down in any way.

If we must have this additional wording, could it be placed below the pending message please.

Thanks.

Helen


moderated Re: Language Definition of Spam

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

I know you weren't responding to me, but I want to say I couldn't agree more.

That being said, I would say that most people, and I do mean the vast majority, recognize spam on sight, and would not consider an off-topic post as spam, because it isn't.  I found the inclusion of off-topic messages with spam a bit muddled myself.  An off topic message or even thread is not spam, though different groups have different cultures surrounding whether or not same is tolerated.

The definition of SPAM has expanded as `new and improved` versions appear.  It really is a category, somewhat like obscenity, in that most people know it when they see it, though some are a bit more sensitive than others as to what might meet either category.  But off-topic post(s) by otherwise valued members isn't.

--

Brian - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1803, Build 17134 
     Explanations exist; they have existed for all time; there is always a well-known solution to every human problem — neat, plausible, and wrong.

          ~ H.L. Mencken, AKA The Sage of Baltimore


moderated Re: Suggestion: Ability to send PM from a member's profile page #suggestion

 

Actually now that I think about it, that's the same as being able to mark a topic "reply to sender," which I suggested in a previous thread should be an option and which Mark said he now wants to implement.
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu

11461 - 11480 of 30023